SCIENTIFIC  REGULATION 

OF 

IMMIGRATION 


STATISTICAL  CALCULATIONS 

Based  on  the  Revised  Plan  of 

The  National  Committee 

for 

Constructive  Immigration  Legislation 


JANUARY  20,  1920 


Headquarters 
105  EAST  22d  STREET 
New  York  City 


INTRODUCTION 


The  National  Committee  for  Constructive  Immigration  Legislation 
advocates  the  regulation  of  all  immigration  on  a  uniform  basis.  It  is 
briefly  this : 

The  United  States  should  so  regulate,  and  where  necessary  re¬ 
strict  immigration  as  to  provide  that  no  more  immigrants  of  each 
people  or  mother-tongue  group  may  be  admitted  than  can  be  whole¬ 
somely  Americanized  and  steadily  employed. 

The  number  of  those  individuals  of  each  people  or  mother-tongue 
group  already  in  Continental  United  States  who  have  become  Ameri¬ 
canized,  affords  the  best  basis  of  the  measure  for  the  future  immigra¬ 
tion  of  that  people. 

On  these  fundamental  principles,  the  National  Committee  suggests 
that  the  annual  permissible  immigration  from  any  given  people  or  mother- 
tongue  group  shall  be  a  certain  per  cent  (say  from  3  to  10)  of  a  basal 
figure  to  be  made  up  of  two  factors. 

(a)  The  number  of  American-born  children  of  that  people  residing 
in  Continental  United  States  as  recorded  in  the  census  of  1920, 
plus 

(b)  The  number  of  naturalized  citizens  of  that  people  residing 
in  Continental  United  States  as  recorded  in  the  last  available 
census. 

Adding  these  two  figures  for  the  given  people  and  multiplying  the 
sum  by  the  percentage  rate  for  the  given  year,  will  give  the  figures  of 
the  permissible  immigration  of  that  people  for  that  year. 

To  show  statistically  how  this  proposal  would  affect  immigration 
from  the  various  peoples,  is  the  purpose  of  this  pamphlet. 

The  first  table  shows  what  the  actual  travel  of  aliens  back  and  forth 
has  been.  Immigrants  and  non-immigrants  (i.  e.,  transients),  emigrants 
and  non-emigrants,  are  all  included. 


2 


TABLE  I 

Total  Immigration  and  Emigration,  1909-1919 


Fiscal  Year 

Total 

Admittances 

Total 

Departures 

Increase  of 
Population 

1909 

944,235 

400,392 

543,843 

1910 

1,198,037 

380,418 

817,619 

1911 

1,030,300 

518,215 

512,085 

1912 

1,017,155 

615,292 

401,863 

1913 

1,427,227 

611,924 

815,303 

1914 

1,403,081 

633,805 

769,276 

1915 

434,244 

384,174 

50,070 

1916 

366,748 

240,807 

125,941 

1917 

362,877 

146,379 

216,498 

1918 

211,853 

193,268 

18,585 

1919 

237,021 

216,231 

20,790 

PROBLEM  I 

How  large  an  immigration  would  have  been  permitted  annually 
to  each  people  during  the  decade  1911-1920,  if  the  percentage  plan 
proposed  by  the  National  Committee  for  Constructive  Immigration 
Legislation  had  been  in  force? 

(a)  From  the  Census  of  1910  (Vol.  1,  p.  875)  we  first  get  the 
figures  of  the  American-born  citizens,  one  or  both  of  whose  parents 
were  born  in  the  specified  foreign  country. 

(b)  From  the  Census  of  1910  (Vol.  1,  p.  1082)  we  then  secure 
the  figures  as  to  the  naturalized  citizens  classified  according  to  their 
native  countries. 

Note:  Since  the  United  States  Census  does  not  classify  naturalized  aliens  or 
their  American-born  children  by  race  (or  mother- tongue)  but  by  country  of  origin, 
our  calculations  must  adopt  this  classification. 

(c)  Adding  together  these  two  elements,  (a)  and  (b),  we  secure 
the  Base  from  which  to  reckon  the  maximum  and  minimum  permissible 
immigration  from  each  country.  These  figures  and  calculations  are 
presented  in  Table  II. 

In  these  calculations  we  assume  that  Congress  has  set  the  per¬ 
missible  rate  at  from  three  to  ten  per  cent  (the  exact  figure  for  any 
given  year  to  be  determined  by  the  proposed  Immigration  Commission). 


TABLE  II 


Maximum  and  Minimum  Permissible  Annual  Immigration  for  the  Decadb 

1911-1920 


Country 
of  Origin 

Census  1910 

Base 

(a)  +  (b) 

Permissible 

Immigration 

American- 

born 

(a) 

Naturalized 

(b) 

Maximum 

10% 

Minimum 

3% 

North  and  West  Europe: 

United  Kingdom . 

5,163,289 

770,094 

5,933,383 

593,338 

178,001 

Germany . 

5,781,437 

889,007 

6,670,444 

667,044 

200,113 

Norway . 

575,241 

121,651 

696,892 

69,689 

20,906 

Sweden . 

699,032 

219,057 

918,089 

91,80'^ 

27,5-42 

Denmark . 

218,443 

63,068 

281,511 

28,151 

8,445 

Holland . 

173,521 

33,922 

207,443 

20,744 

6,223 

Belgium,  etc . 

43,744 

11,869 

55,613 

5,561 

1,668 

France . 

175,153 

29,613 

204,766 

20,476 

6,142 

Switzerland . 

176,816 

42,760 

219,576 

21,957 

6,587 

15,187,717 

1,518,768 

455,627 

South  and  East  Europe: 

Portugal . 

53,499 

7,141 

60,640 

6,064 

1,819 

Spain . . . . . . 

11,157 

2,318 

13,475 

1,347 

500 

Italy . 

755,290 

126,523 

881,813 

88,181 

26,454 

Russia . 

938,897 

192,264 

1,131,161 

113,116 

33,934 

Finland . . . 

81,357 

21,669 

103,026 

10,302 

3,090 

Austria . 

826,635 

149,914 

976,549 

97,654 

29,296 

Hungary . 

204,627 

36,610 

241,237 

24,123 

7,237 

Roumania . 

21,801 

8,014 

29,815 

2,981 

894 

Bulgaria,  etc . 

1,234 

821 

2,055 

1,000 

500 

Greece . 

8,401 

4,946 

13,347 

1,334 

500 

Turkey  in  Europe . 

3,093 

1,474 

4,567 

1,000 

500 

Turkey  in  Asia . 

18,929 

6,940 

25,869 

2,586 

776 

3,483,554 

349,694 

105,500 

China . 

14,935 

1,368 

16,303 

1,630 

500 

Japan . 

4,502 

420 

4,922 

1,000 

500 

Grand  Total . . . . 

1,871,092 

562,129 

! 

PROBLEM  II 

How  much  immigration  would  have  been  excluded  during  the 
decade  1900-1919  if  the  proposed  percentage  plan  had  been  in 
operation? 

The  following  table  (III)  shows  the  amount  of  immigration  (not 
including  transients)  from  the  important  countries  since  1900.  At  the 
bottom  are  given  the  maximum  and  minimum  figures  effective  during 
the  past  decade.  By  comparing  these  figures,  therefore,  for  any  people 
with  the  immigration  of  that  people  for  any  year  since  1910,  we  see 
at  once  whether  or  not  the  percentage  restriction  plan  would  have 
restricted  immigration  for  that  year  from  that  country,  and  if  so,  by 
striking  the  difference  we  see  how  much  approximately  it  would  have 
been  restricted. 


4 


TABLE  III 

Immigration  Into  the  United  States  from  Selected  Countries  (Not  Including  Transients) 


•o 

a 

£ 

<v 

a 

CO 


(Nr-»'«tiCOCO©©OOi-l'^COCO©"<t<r-(<MCO'— 

>COrHOO(NcOTt(^00  05COiOOOH^cOHCO 
HiNCO  ©  ©_C^QO  t-jN^©  © C^t^CO  05  CO 

1-T  <n*  <N*  co*  ©*  CO  CO*  CO*  O*  CO  CO*  CO  ^  rjT  r-T 


t- t- 

©  00 
05  © 

y*  CO 

<N 


France 

©©t>O0©O0©T-HO0<NCOC3O0©©T-i©t'~O000 
CO‘OrHNOOO)COCOt''00(M(NN©HiOOO©© 
r^i— i  i-i  ©  >-<  CO  t*-  l^co  CO  ^cO  CO  C^OO  i>  © 

i-T  CO  CO  ©”  oT  ©*  ©*  ©  00  CO  I>  00  CO  ©*  © rjT  rfT  CO  t-T  <N~ 

I— <  iH 

20,476 

6,142 

©©t^©©CO©©<N(NJ<Nlr-lC5©CO©©OOCO 

t-H  00 

S 

©t^l>-©r^©©©©©Oi-H©O©©00©l^ 

©  © 

•  •— < 

^-MO»0'^l©COOCOr-(COrtHJ>T-iTft^CO©CO 

©  © 

T-Ii-Jcsicoco©'©©-^^©©'^!^©^ 

©i-7 

CQ 

©©’'fO0©Tt<©t^©O0T}<001><MT-i’<t<©©Tt«© 

CO 

r; 

C0Tf'00©»-i»O^©rri©C0i0©O(M"^rHC0'^C0 

Tt<  <M 

cd 

I>CO<N©©©©©©©©CO©©COi-i©<N©t^ 

<N 

r— ^ 

o 

tH  <N  <N  CO rH  Tf<  CO  UD  Tti  !>  00  ©  ©  ©  CO  <N  <N 

©  © 

ffi 

<N 

rt 

*> 

HT}<OONCOIOHIOIOON»O^NHCOHHOH 

00  CO 

aJ 

©COCOT*i©<N00©h'-©©OO©©©O0©t>-©© 

TH  05 

J3 

H<NO©0©N©rHTf(N(N>CNCOOONNiO(N 

©  00 

•o 

»-i©TtH>©©<N©©<NOO<NI^<N©t^Tt<CO©00 

©  © 

c 

COCO©I>©©©t^COCO’^'^C<ICOOI»Hi-«t-H 

oo  © 

£ 

i—4 

>. 

b-rHTfl©O<^Tt<b-©©C0^00©’>^©I>l>»l>t^ 

Tt<  CO 

c 

©©OOOOOt>©0©''tfOO©CO<NCO©t'-©Tt<CO 

r-H 

c3 

C 

©©CO©CO©©OOCO©<N©l>COt>l>OOOOTt4CO 

©  1-H 

C 

l-. 

00  1-H  00  ©  ©  ©  t>- <N  lO  >-!  <N  r^  Tin  ©  t>  03  r-t  y* 

r-  o 

v 

»-H(M(NrtiT}HT^COCOCO<NCOCO(NCOCO 

©  © 

0 

©<N 

E 

o 

•o 

h/) 

t^.©©l>©Tt<CON-©©©©©Tt<IXN(Mr-it^T-l 

00  y* 

c 

C0T^C0TtH©C0©©00(N©©r^Or^(N©rt<Tt<t>. 

CO  © 

5 

M»CO©iO*Hr-iioC0001>’>t©(N'^'^l>iH00N 

CO  © 

GC©©OOt^U-C3COCOi-<00<N<NOCCO»-tTHcO<M© 

CO  00 

•o 

rt<  r*  ©  00  CO  ©  rH  ©  ©  ©  00  00  t>- <M  i-h  rj< 

©  t> 

4-» 

l— t  »— 1  rH  trH 

©  yi 

c 

p 

rt 

<u 


Oi-«C^C0^iOCOt''.00  05©.-<<NC0TtHOC0t^0005 
C)  CD  CD  CD  05  CD  CD)  05  CD  r— (  i-h  r— t  h  *-h  »-h  r— i  ?— <  rH 
©  ©  05  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  ©  © 


TABLE  III  (Concluded) 

Immigration  Into  the  United  States  from  Selected  Countries  (Not  Including  Transients) 


>. 

V 

u 

3 

H 


41 

O 

<v 

<u 

u 

o 


t-'-OOt-OCSTfiOCOrHi'-t'-OSCOiOr-ieOiOOOOO 
Tt<OH^NCJiri(N'i((NHcocooO'H»ocoTtuoH 
CM_  1-^ CD  ID  CD_ 00  CO  O  ID  CD  CD  CQ  O  D  05_ ID 

^c0>CD00aToiD*>00r-icDC0TtiL-.0005TjHi--l 

hhnnhconncon 


CM  CO 
©  (05 

coi-T 


HO^OLOiDOOOHCOcOOMNfN^^OM  O 

NHOa>rt<H000000H00(NrtiHC0O5C0NHH  COO 

1>  O  rH  o  CO  ID  TP  ID  ■ tF h  00_  CM^ Tf  00  00  ir 5  CD  O  O  00  CO  ID 

CO  ID  00  "eft  i— i  cT  O  CO  i-i  tM  icT  CD  —h  CM  ID  05 f—  CO  rH  — T 

rH  rH  rH  rH  0Q  CM  rH  CM  CM  CM  CM  CO  rH  CM  CM 


CJ 

•  •-4 

a 

§ 

3 

O 


O  iO  CO  O  N  N  O  00  O  lO  M  N  >0  N  H  O  CO  O  O  <-*  rt< 
iDiCD>H00C0N00(N©Tt((N03l0C00005OiO(»  00  05 

^hhcoO'^^CONiDhiDOhO'#  0500 

o'  f-"  «>"  oT  t>“  TjT  r>T  r}T  ID  i-T  CM*  CM*  tH  Cm"  h*  (N 


3 

M 

a 

3 

X 

3 


to 

3 

< 


i/i 

to 

3 

ft 


t'-O05rHCDC000CM05rHr^t--CMl0CMrHrH00rHCM 
■^DCOHiODCOiDODWiDOOMiDHDiDOW 
00^  CO  0^0  rHCOH^lCHNOOOOOrHlQHN 

^  CO*  r-T  cd"  I>~  id"  id" 00  oo"  CD  00  cT  co"  rjT 00  00  ID  1-T 
HHNONNOfOONiDiDNiCNH 
rH  rH  rH  CM  rH  CM  CM  CO  rH  rH  O'!  t- H  rt  CM  CM 


NNNCOHNIDCOHONhiOOONCKONN 
OOiDTf05rf050^fr-icD05CM05'^000'>^T-H'!tiCO 
!>■_  CM_  CO  O  r-^  GO  CD_  CD  I>  rt^  NNCCO  O  H  00  t-CM^iD 

OiDND  id" tjT id" 00" co" o" CD* GO  Cm" H  id" CD* t'" CM* t*T _T 
OOOOCO^QOtHiDiOINOOiDCOaiiDN  1-4 
HHHHC5NHHHHHC5N 


co 

t'.g 

rH  "* 

CM  r'£> 

co 


CD  rt« 
1-1  CO 
j— (  05 

CO  co 
r— <  co 


^■h 

3 


iDCCiDCMcOOSOt-hcOGOI'-CMtHCMOOGGiDCQOCO 
C005J>CM05t-CMC0OrHC000C0TCiC000CD05iD05 
H  CD  CO  CO  CM^  rH  ID  CM_  id  GO  r-^  W  t-_  CD  CD_  ID  CM^  CO 

O  »D  00  O  CO  1— I  CO  ID  00  CO  ID  CM  I>  ID*  CO*  oT  CO*  rjT  ID  co" 
©CCI>C005CMI>.OOCMOOrHOO»OCDOO^COCO 
— H  rH  rH  CM  r— t  CM  CM  CM  rH  r— I  CM  1— 4  t— I  CM  CM 


rH 

00  ID 

— H  Tfrt 

00  co" 

00  CM 


3 

to 

3 

4-* 

l-l 

o 

cu 


Tf4iDt>.l>lD00r^001>COC5’^©*— I  00  05  ID 

CODOHHCMHOOiDNNTONOOiONCM.n 
CM_ rH  CO  CO  ©_ ID  CD CO  C5_ CM_ CO  CM_ H  00  CD CM_ 05  CM_  LD 

UH  -rh  id"  o"  co"  id"  oo"  C5~  t>"  Tin"  oo"  00  o"  r^"  ©"  t*T  Cm"  ©"  Cm"w 


Hfl  05 
CO  i—i 

O  GO 

<o‘h 


>-> 

3 

CJ 


Or- iMCO^lDONOOCiOr- iMCOrJUOCONOO®1 
^0  O  CD  CD  CD  O  CD  05  O  O  rH  I— I  r— I  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH 
05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05  05 


H 

H 

CQ 

►H 

to  • 
to 


CL 


6 


PROBLEM  III 


How  large  an  immigration  will  be  permitted  annually  from  each 
country  during  the  decade  1921-1930  if  the  percentage  plan  proposed 
by  the  National  Committee  for  Constructive  Immigration  Legislation 

is  in  force? 

No  exact  answer  to  this  question  is  possible  because  the  United 
States  Census  of  1920  is  not  yet  available.  An  effort  to  forecalculate 
these  figures  is  beset  with  many  insuperable  difficulties.  No  figures  are 
available  showing  how  many  American-born  children  we  now  have 
(1920)  one  or  both  of  whose  parents  are  foreign-born.  Moreover, 
although  the  Bureau  of  Naturalization  publishes  annually  the  number 
of  those  naturalized,  these  figures  are  not  classified  by  race  or  country. 
The  total  for  the  fiscal  years  ending  June  30,  1911-1918,  is  750,325. 

If,  nevertheless,  the  curious  insist  upon  some  kind  of  an  estimate* 
the  following  procedure  may  be  suggested : 

<  1)  Start  with  the  numbers  of  native-born  and  of  naturalized  in 
1910  as  given  in  Table  II,  columns  (a)  and  (b). 

(2)  Each  number  in  each  column  will  be  reduced  by  deaths  during 
the  decade  1911-20  and  increased  in  the  case  of  column  (a)  by  births 
in  the  United  States,  1911-20,  of  children  one  or  both  of  whose  parents 
was  born  in  the  specified  country  of  origin  and  in  the  case  of  column 
(b)  by  the  naturalization,  1911-20,  of  natives  of  the  specified  country 
of  origin. 

(3)  The  deaths  can  be  estimated  by  assuming  a  probable  death 
rate  for  the  class  under  examination. 

(4)  The  births  to  be  added  to  column  (a)  can  be  estimated  by 
assuming  a  birth  rate  ( 1 )  for  the  natives  of  that  country  who  were  here 
in  1910  and  (2)  for  the  net  immigration  from  that  country  during  the 
decade  1911-1920. 

(5)  The  number  of  persons  naturalized  to  be  added  to  the  figures 
in  column  (b)  might  be  roughly  estimated  by  distributing  the  total  per¬ 
sons  naturalized  each  year  as  shown  by  the  Bureau  of  Naturalization  to 
the  various  countries  of  origin  in  accordance  with  the  proportion  pre¬ 
vailing  in  1910  among  those  who  had  taken  out  first  papers  and  were  then 
on  the  road  to  complete  naturalization. 

The  National  Committee  does  not  regard  the  results  which  may 
thus  be  secured  as  having  any  real  value.  There  are  too  many  uncertain¬ 
ties.  Nor  does  the  Committee  regard  such  a  forecalculation  as  par¬ 
ticularly  necessary.  The  figures  given  in  Table  II  show  what  would 
have  happened  during  the  decade  1911-1920.  And  from  these  figures 
a  general  forecast  is  possible  for  the  coming  decade. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  large  immigration  from  south,  central 
and  east  Europe  came  after  1900,  it  seems  quite  probable  that  the  number 
of  their  American-born  children  who  will  be  recorded  in  the  Census  of 


7 


1920  plus  those  naturalized  of  those  peoples  will  permit  a  very  substantial 
increase  of  immigration  for  the  decade  1921-1930  over  that  which  wouM 
have  been  permitted  on  the  same  basis  during  the  decade  1911-1920.  In 
other  words,  it  may  perhaps  be  roughly  estimated  that  the  permissible 
annual  immigration  for  1921-1930,  at  the  maximum  rate  of  10%,  would 
be  somewhere  between  500,000  and  600,000  instead  of  348,349  as  calcu¬ 
lated  for  the  decade  1911-1920.  The  permissible  immigration  from 
northwest  Europe  for  1921-1930  would  be  somewhat  increased  over  that 
for  1911-1920,  but  not  by  the  same  proportion. 

In  the  case  of  the  Japanese,  however,  a  forecalculation  is  highly 
important  and  also  fortunately  quite  possible.  The  results  of  such  a  cal¬ 
culation  are  given  in  the  next  discussion. 

PROBLEM  IV 

How  would  the  percentage  plan  affect  immigration  from  Japan? 

1.  During  the  Decade  1911-1920. 

According  to  the  Census  of  1910  the  number  of  American-born 
Japanese  in  Continental  United  States  was  4,502,  and  the  number  of 
the  naturalized  was  420  giving  a  “base”  of  4,922.  Since  this  figure  is 
less  than  20,000  the  permissible  annual  immigration,  as  provided  by 
the  proposed  law,  would  have  been  1,000  annually  at  the  maximum  rate 
and  500  at  the  minimum  rate. 

The  actual  arrivals  and  departure  of  Japanese  to  and  from  Conti¬ 
nental  United  States  for  the  years  1911-1919  is  given  in  Table  IV.  If 
the  law  proposed  by  the  National  Committee  for  Constructive  Immigra¬ 
tion  Legislation  had  been  in  effect  it  is  evident  that  the  amount  of  Jap¬ 
anese  immigration  would  have  been  highly  restricted. 


TABLE  IV 

Japanese  Admitted  to  and  Departed  from  Continental  United  States 


Total 

Admitted 

Former 

Residents 

New 

Arrivals 

Departed 

Difference 

1909 

2,432 

850 

1,582 

5,004 

-2,572 

1910 

2,595 

838 

1,757 

5,024 

-2,426 

1911 

4,282 

1,203 

3,080 

5,868 

-1,587 

1912 

5,358 

1,869 

3,489 

5,437 

-79 

1913 

6,771 

2,893 

3,878 

5,646 

+  1,124 

1914 

8,462 

3,852 

4,610 

6,300 

+2,162 

1915 

9,029 

4,063 

4,966 

5,967 

+3,062 

1916 

9,100 

4,150 

4,950 

6,922 

42,178 

1917 

9,150 

4,123 

5,022 

6,581 

42,578 

1918 

11,143 

4,958 

6,185 

7,691 

+3,452 

1919 

11,404 

4,096 

7,303 

8,328 

+3,076 

79,726 

32,899 

43,827 

68,768 

10,968 

8 


2.  During  the  Decade  1921-1930. 

(a)  American-born  Japanese  in  Continental  United  States  recorded 
in  the  Census  of  1910  numbered  4,502.  Deaths  at  5  per  1,000  annually 
for  ten  years  will  amount  to  225,  leaving  4,277  survivors  in  1920. 

(b)  According  to  the  Census  of  1910  (Bulletin  127  p.  26)  Japanese 
children  under  five  years  of  age  in  Continental  United  States  (3,608) 
exceeded  those  in  California  (2,411)  by  41  per  cent,  and  the  married 
women  (5,581  and  3,916  respectively)  by  42  per  cent.  We  may  there¬ 
fore  assume  that  during  the  decade  1911-1920  Japanese  children  born  in 
Continental  United  States  exceeded  those  born  in  California  by  42  per 
cent. 

Now  the  California  State  Board  of  Health  reports  Japanese  births 
for  the  years  1911-1918.  Estimating  births  for  1919  and  1920  (total 
for  decade  32,787),  calculating  deaths  at  the  mortality  rates  given  in  the 
United  States  Life  Tables  (p.  16)  (total  for  decade  5,087)  and  multiply¬ 
ing  the  survivors  by  42  per  cent,  we  find  that  Japanese  born  in  Con¬ 
tinental  United  States  during  the  decade  and  surviving  in  1920  will  be 
approximately  39,334. 


TABLE  V 

Births  and  Deaths  of  Japanese  Children  in  California 


Births 

Deaths 

Fiscal 

Year 

Num¬ 

ber 

1911 

1912 

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916 

1917 

1918 

1919 

1920 

Total 

1911 

1912 

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916 

1917 

1918 

995 

1,467 

2,215 

2,874 

3,342 

3,721 

4,108 

4,365 

113 

24 

168 

10 

35 

253 

6 

15 

54 

329 

4 

9 

23 

70 

383 

4 

7 

14 

30 

92 

426 

3 

5 

10 

19 

40 

91 

470 

2 

4 

8 

13 

25 

39 

100 

500 

2 

4 

7 

11 

17 

24 

97 

106 

2 

3 

6 

9 

14 

17 

42 

103 

170 

250 

375 

481 

571 

597 

709 

709 

/Esti-  \1919 
\mated/1920 

Total 

4,700 

5,000 

538 

114 

573 

652 

573 

3?, 78 

5,087 

Adding  results  (4,277+39,334)  we  find  that  American-born  Japanese 
in  Continental  United  States  who  will  probably  be  recorded  in  the  Census 
of  1920  will  be  approximately  43,611.  Since  some  of  these  will  have  re¬ 
turned  to  Japan  we  shall  use  43,000  in  our  further  calculations. 

The  number  of  naturalized  Japanese  recorded  in  the  Census  of  1920 
will  probably  be  inappreciable,  since  none  have  been  naturalized  during  the 


9 


past  decade  and  those  who  were  recorded  in  the  Census  of  1910  (420) 
are  regarded  by  the  Census  Bureau  as  having  been  errors,  (cf.  Bulletin 
127  p.  11.) 

The  “Base”  therefore  is  43,000  and  the  permissible  annual  immigra¬ 
tion  for  the  decade  1921-1930  will  be 

At  the  maximum  rate,  10%  of  43,000=4,300 

At  the  minimum  rate,  3%  of  43,000=1,290 

3.  During  the  Decade  1931-1940. 

(a)  The  basal  figure  for  American-born  Japanese  will  be  that 
already  caluculated— 43,000. 

(b)  The  new  law  will  permit  everyone  to  become  a  citizen  who 
will  properly  qualify.  How  many  Japanese  in  Continental  United  States 
will  be  able  and  will  desire  to  do  so?  No  one  knows.  Nor  is  there  any 
basis  for  a  statistical  estimate.  Making  allowances  for  deaths  and  for 
immigration  during  the  decade  1921-1930,  the  number  of  alien  Japanese 
in  Continental  United  States  will  be  approximately  55,000  to  60,000.  In 
view,  however,  of  the  known  difficulty  for  a  Japanese  in  acquiring  the 
English  language,  in  view  of  the  improbability  that  women  in  any  con¬ 
siderable  numbers  will  be  able  to  qualify,  in  view  of  the  high  standards 
for  naturalization  proposed  by  the  National  Committee,  in  view  of  the 
probable  strictness  with  which  those  who  administer  the  law  on  the 
Pacific  Coast  will  administer  it  in  the  case  of  Japanese  applicants,  and  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  a  considerable  majority  of  the  Japanese  are  in 
agricultural  pursuits  where  opportunities  for  learning  English  are  poor, 
we  conclude  that  the  number  who  can  and  will  secure  citizenship  will  be 
relatively  small,  perhaps  15,000.  This  is  probably  an  over-generous 
estimate. 

(c)  The  Base  will  therefore  be  58,000  (43,0004-15,000). 

(d)  The  Permissible  Immigration  will  be 

At  the  maximum  rate,  10%  of  58,000=5,800 

At  the  minimum  rate,  3%  of  58,000=1,740 


10 


CONCLUSIONS 


1.  If  the  proposed  law  had  been  passed  in  1910,  it  would  not 
have  restricted  pre-war  immigration  from  northwest  Europe  even  at 
the  minimum  rate  of  three  per  cent.  From  west,  south,  central  and  east 
Europe  there  would  have  been  a  slight  restriction  of  immigration  on  a 
ten  per  cent  rate,  and,  on  a  three  per  cent  rate,  especially  from  Italy, 
Austria,  Hungary,  and  Russia,  considerable  restriction.  The  permis¬ 
sible  immigration  from  both  China  and  Japan  would  have  been  ma¬ 
terially  reduced. 

2.  In  case  no  change  is  made  at  this  time  in  the  immigration  laws, 
we  shall  be  subject  to  a  possible  flood  of  immigration  from  central,  south¬ 
ern  and  northeastern  Europe,  of  which  we  can  at  present  make  no 
probable  forecast,  as  the  variable  factors  are  too  many  and  too  uncertain. 

3.  In  view  of  this  fact  we  contend  that  the  early  passagge  of 
the  proposed  law  is  highly  important.  If  it  should  turn  out  that  the 
immigration  from  Europe  is  so  small  that  the  law  would  not  in  the 
least  affect  it,  it  would  in  that  case  have  no  effect.  But  if  the  immigra¬ 
tion  should  suddenly  rise  to  two  or  three  or  even  four  millions  in 
the  course  of  a  couple  years,  we  would  be  helpless  in  the  face  of  a 
condition  that  we  could  not  control  or  cope  with.  We  would  be  forced 
into  some  kind  of  hurried  emergency  legislation,  which  could  not  fail 
to  work  great  hardship  on  the  millions  already  started  or  preparing  to 
start  on  their  journey  hither.  If,  however,  we  had  already  enacted 
a  law  of  the  kind  proposed,  it  would  automatically  deal  with  the  situation 
before  it  becomes  acute,  because  it  would  be  well  known  to  all  shipping 
and  railroad  agents  in  Europe  and  thus  to  every  prospective  immigrant 
before  he  would  take  the  decisive  step  of  breaking  his  home  relations. 

4.  The  proposed  lav/  will  enable  the  United  States  to  keep  faith 
with  China  in  regard  to  the  observance  of  treaty  obligations.  It  will 
also  remove  from  our  relations  with  Japan  those  features  that  are 
causing  continued  irritation. 

For  a  full  statement  of  the  proposals  of  the  National  Committee, 
with  a  copy  of  the  proposed  bill  and  the  reasons  for  urging  this  legis¬ 
lation,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  pamphlet  “Proposed  Laws  for 
Regulating  Immigration  and  for  Raising  the  Standards  for  Natural¬ 
ization.” 

The  National  Committee  invites  the  active  co-operation  of  every 
one  who  desires  to  have  the  immigration  and  naturalization  laws  amended 
along  the  lines  advocated  by  this  Committee. 

SIDNEY  L.  GULICK,  Secretary, 
National  Committee  for  Constructive  Immigration  Legislation, 
105  East  22nd  Street,  New  York  City. 


11 


-Japanese  Aliens  Admitted  to  and  Departed  from 
Continental  United  States  (excluding Hawaii ) 


0 

0 

* 

0 

0 

0 

0 

o' 

I  . - 

0 

0* 

- — { - 

0 

0 

«o' 

- , — 1- 

ui 


£ 

ra 

<  a 


a 

h  ^ 
$  rQ 
P-  O 
C)  v* 

a* 


£  1 
a 
* 

$ 

.5 


12 


JQ05  19 10  19  k5  I92O  1925  19*30  1 9*3.5  *9^0 


